Home - List All Discussions

My thoughts about abortion

by: firestar

As I write this I know that many people will not agree with me but I think that abortion is a good thing. I child can really ruin somebodies life. For instance if a teenager gets pregnant she won't be able to study, or to work and she may have to spend her life in a caravan. Or if a girl gets raped and then learns than she may have to give birth. Won't this child always remind her of what happed to her. Also I think this thing (I will call it a thing because it isn't a child yet) doesn't feel anything. Its nervous system isn't formed so it can't feel pain, sadness or happiness. Unlike animals. They can feel all that but I bet most of you still eat meat. I just can't understand that. And I know you will not understand me but I had to say this.

reply from: Shenanigans

A quick, but well worded search in Google will quickly dispel your ill informed ideas about abortion. Or perhaps a visit to your local library and a visit to the medical and biology section will disprove your notions about foetal development. Investment in a good dictionary would also not go astray, as a child is defined as anyone under teh age of 12, including those in the gestational stage.
As an aside, there's a female Autobot called Firestar.

reply from: faithman

http://www.lifeissues.org/windows.html

reply from: firestar

What does the Autobot have to do with anything.
And what is so ill about my ideas.

reply from: lukesmom

You are right, since this is a prolife board, most here won't agree with you but, yet, you post here. Good thing since your sound young and possibly looking for answers?
Not true. We are all responsible for the success/failure of our lives, no one can make us succeed or fail/"ruin" our lives without our permission. It is a cop out to blame an innocent unborn child for possibly causing failure when the blame is on the people who created that innocent life.
A "caravan"? As in a minivan? Many teens who have babies study, go to school and/or work. Heck, I wasn't a teen but I had a 2 year old, was pg went to school part time and worked full time. Just because a woman doesn't want to do this, doesn't make it doable. Even if she chooses not to do this she has the option of adoption which will allow her to live her life outside of a "caravan" if she so chooses.
When she aborts she becomes the victim a second time. Abortion is a negative, distructive act same as rape. Again, she does not have to raise this child, adoption into a loving family would solve the possible problem of seeing her child who, BTW, is 1/2 her. If she aborts this child, she is killing part herself an innocent part who also has done no wrong.
A "thing" is not alive. The unborn ARE alive. The unborn are prechildren just as you, I bet, are a preadult and I am preelderly. An embryo is just in an earlier stage of developement than a child is. Actually when an unborn child can feel pain is in debate and I feel is a hypothysis. Even if he/she can't feel pain, is it ok to you to kill anyone who doesn't feel pain. There is a genetic disorder that causes the sufferer not to feel pain. Would it be ok to kill them? How about someone in an irreversable coma or in a vegatative state? Be careful here, slippery slope.
As for eating meat, because I LOVE steak, I should condone the killing of millions of fellow humans? Don't see how this is revelant unless I am actually eating fellow humans. Since this is not the case, I don't see how this arguement is valid.
Not "understand" you? Honey, you are not the only one to come here uninformed about prenatal developement and what abortion actually does. It is good you are searching for other views, that is how you form beliefs. FYI, the prolife movement is about not only the unborn child but also about women in crisis. We "understand" much more than you think. Some of us have actually lived what you accuse us of not understanding.

reply from: Banned Member

Oh.. we understand you alright. As a human being you have the right to life and the right to use your own brain to think about things and then express your conclusions. We would only ask that you further your education a tad more before writing your thesis.
Your conclusion is that killing your offspring is justified because a baby represents an inconvenience to you. How does that sound to you when expressed in this way?
Also, somehow, you claim to personally stand on higher moral ground than those who disapprove of abortion because you don't consume meat.
As I said before, you have every right to express your young opinion. In doing so you've informed us that you have performed no personal research on the verifiable facts of this topic, that you have no moral regard towards your own unborn offspring, and that you have trouble moving your bowels without eating tons of roughage. Thank you for sharing.
Now please try to realize that you don't know 10% of the facts concerning abortion, the depths of horror it represents, or the devastation it causes abortive mothers.
Please, for your sake, for our sake, and for your future babies' sake, educate yourself before you inadvertently kill an innocent person.

reply from: Shenanigans

Your name is Firestar.
Firestar is an Autobot.
Dots. Pen. Connect. ^_^
Boss summed it up nicely, but to recap.
1. Your assertion that a child can ruin someone's life.
A car crash can ruin someone's life, doesn't mean we don't use cars. "Ruin" is also subjective. What does one class as a life having been "ruined"? The fact they may have to put off graduation for a few years? Missing out on a promotion? Having to forego the purchase of a Playstation 3?
And if an individual seems to view the up and coming baby as somethign that will "ruin" their life, then there is adoption, why not make a couple very very happy? You spare yoruself the "ruination" a baby may or maynot bring, you give joy to a childless couple, and you don't actually commit an act of homicide against your own child.
2. Rape.
Go have a poke around for "victims vs. victors", its a study that found a good chunk of women who were raped and fell pregnant did not abort. More and more women are standing up to this digusting societal view that rape victims want abortions and these women are giving birth to their children.
It puts a lot of pressure on a woman who has been raped and is now pregnant to hear the "rape victims want abortions" rubbish from society, it pressures them to have an abortions out of fear that peopel won't beleive they were raped as "who would want to keep theri rapist's baby" BS.
Further, you made note that a baby fathered by a rapist would be a constant reminder or the rape. Its rather assanine as that seems to make one think that abortion "unrapes" a woman. Whether she falls pregnant or not, whether she has an aboriton or not, whether she keeps the child or places them for an abortion. She will always have been raped. She will find reminders of it EVERYWHERE, from people she sees on the street to other rape cases in the media.
Killing a child only compounds her guilt and grieft and is a good way for those around her to move on as they're the ones who don't have to deal with it. Its pure selfishness.
3. "Its" not a child. "Its" not alive.
I made the comment about child being anyone under the age of 12 including those in the gestational stage.
Peopel tend to get mixed up between child and baby/neonate. A "baby" is a stage of development that takes place AFTER birth, just like toddler, adolescent et al. So a baby, toddler, pre-adolescent are children, just as the foetus, embyro, zygote are children, those last three are just not babies, just like toddler and pre-adol. isn't.
Its gotta be alive, because if it wasn't, it'd be dead. And since we're not all starting life as "zombie foetuses" (which would be an awesome idea for a move, BTW).
4. Doesn't feel pain. Animals do.
There is an expanding body of work that is starting to support the notion that the foetus can feel pain from at least 24 weeks. In fact some research is finding that the foetus is actually MORE sensitive to stimilu then the adult, its all about the development of nerves and the lack of a good strong skin, like what we have.
Animals don't "feel" like we do, they dont' get "sad" or "angry" or "happy", their responses are built into them as reflexes and survivial mechanisms. A dog will wag its tail and appear "happy" to see you because it knows from experience if it does that you will feed it, walk it, and give it attention.
Pain sensation in animals is much like ours, but we have evolved emotions that we can attriubute to it. Pain sensation in animals is for their survival, if something is hot and burning them, they know to move away from it, because standing next to it could get it killed.
The other point here, is it doesn't matter if someone can or cannot feel pain, it does not justify killing them.
If you are interested in this look up sentience vs. sapience.
An animal will always be an animal. It will never be human, as much as we want to allocate our emotions to it. It will never sit down and have a "conversation" with us, it will never feel love or hate or anger or spite, it will only "react" in ways we can personify for our own comfort.
I've seen plenty of animals butchered, and they really have no concept of what's happening from an emotional standpoint.
I would strongly recommend further reading, start with anatomy and physiology books of foetal development, studies of women's mental health after abortion, the social structures that are and are not in place for women with unplanned pregnanices.
I think you'll develop an understanding of why pro-abortion is a crock and completely based on lies, false assumptions and sob stories.
Pro-life is the only logical and woman centred opinion to hold.

reply from: Elessar

You are right, I don't agree with you. Abortion is not a good thing. A child does not ruin a life. Parents ruin children's lives. Do you think that children should have the right to kill their parents? A teen can be a mother and study. And what on God's earth is a caravan? You mean like a dodge mini-van or traveling gypsies or bedouins? A child doesn't always have to remind a women that she was raped, but don't you think that every child that she sees will remind her of the one she killed? A thing? Are you for real? How old are you? A child is not a thing. A thing is something that people don't have a name for or something that people don't understand. As for animals... I'm not even going there.

reply from: Shenanigans

When I hear the word "caravan" I think of this:
http://www.cmw.co.nz/images/sales/caravan5.jpg

I think the American term is "trailer".

reply from: lukesmom

Now it makes sense! A trailer!

reply from: firestar

First I never said that I stand on I higher moral ground than anyone. I know and respect so many people that eat meat. They have got the right to chose. I believe that everybody has got that right. That is why I don't understand why you want to take away the right of a women to chose if she wants to have a child or not.
Second I think that it is egoistic to have I child before you are ready to provide it with everything it needs. I love children but I know that they need so much care and love that can't be given to them in a orphanage.

reply from: yosephdaviyd

Hey Firestar
That you visited a pro-life board and opened yourself up shows a great deal of maturity and proves that you are open to having your logic challenged and reformed. I respect that A LOT!
Anyway I am late to this discussion and don't have anything new to add, expect to say that there is never justification to taking the life of another human being - regardless of their stage of development. More especially a defenseless child, who if you asked them, would choose to live. Indeed, when we have sex outside of marriage and disrupt the created order of thing, children become an inconvenient, but, again, that is the consequence of having sex outside of marriage. Why should a child have to pay the ultimate price for your selfish and reckless behavior? Granted, you may not be stable enough to raise a child, but adoption is a far better option than murder. Granted the prenatal child's father may be his grandfather, uncle, or a rapist, but that does not mean we should kill the child because their father is a jerk, and there are a lot of good people who have jerks for fathers.
So, just continue to refine your logic - work on what you have been told about the nervous system and pain and emotions. Regardless the stage of development it IS a human being. People who are full grown have problems with their nervous system, senses and emotions, but we don't kill them do we? Not many years ago if a child was born 3 months early it died, but now medical science has caught up and can keep children alive who are born too early and they develop well. In the future, technology will probably be able to keep children alive who are born much earlier than that.
Give life a chance!
David L. Gray
(Yoseph Daviyd)
------------------------------
* Blog - http://yosephmdaviyd.blogspot.com/

* Articles - http://www.associatedcontent.com/user/871946/david_l_gray_yoseph_david.html

reply from: JasonFontaine

Hey Firestar -
Think of it this way....EVERYONE here - with all our intellectual ability and understanding and "choice" - we all started the way of the fetus.
Kind of silly to think so much thought and attention can be given to something we all derived from - isn't it?
Think of an analogy...analogies are good ways to lead us into a better understanding of ourselves. These are simple reminders that will connect the dots if you will when logic and understanding are clouded...
Plant a seed. Is it still a seed when the tree grows? In 100 years when the branches sway with the mighty wind - is it still a seed? Only the tree knows...
And, of course - the analogy of the egg which I prefer....look at any fertilized egg in a barn. It has no head. No legs. No mouth to be fed. Is it simply an egg forever then? Given a little time - let us see...
Abortion - is not a choice. The "choice" was made to have this abortion - and it boils down to convenience....for what human would decide arbitrarily to end the process of life? Really....it's that simple....and of course choice begins BEFORE conception - but this is routinely forgotten....
As for rape and medical emergency for the mother - these are what choices are about. These are difficult/private decisions. This IS choice....but unfortunately the vast majority of abortions are a matter of convenience. It's BIG business and there are LOTS of "doctors" who must make their BMW payments....

reply from: faithman

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Trolls4Life/134835289891790?ref=ts

reply from: AshMarie88

My cousin got pregnant at 16, had her baby at 17. Finished high school when she was supposed to, graduated with her class, went to college. Had baby #2 2 years ago when it wasn't very convenient. Those kids are extremely loved and even though she had her kids early, I would never say 'they ruined her life". I am obviously not going to show you a photo but if you saw it, you would see what I mean.
If a woman gets raped, so many things in life could remind her of the rape. The only way to get rid of those reminders would be to die, and I don't think you want a woman to die, correct?
A woman could pass by a man on the street who reminds her of her rapist. A woman could see lots of pregnant women and newborn babies and remember she was once pregnant with her baby that was conceived from rape. A woman could be seeking therapy and just cannot forget the rape. And since abortion is a very heated and famous topic, a woman can hear the word "abortion" every day and remember she had one and WHY she had one.
Reminders shouldn't make something ok.
Pain sensors are present by week 7 and they keep developing until about week 32. Preborn babies and newborns feel 10 times more pain than adults.
Also, it IS a child. The baby isn't a "thing", a "thing" isn't alive. The tv is a "thing", the couch is a "thing", a car is a "thing", a living human being is not a "thing". Here is what the dictionary came up with for the word "child"
child? ?
- noun, plural chil·dren.
1.
a person between birth and full growth;
2.
a son or daughter:
3.
a baby or infant.
4.
a human fetus.
5.
a childish person:
6.
a descendant:
and let's check "baby"
ba·by? ?
- noun
1.
an infant or very young child.
2.
a newborn or very young animal.
3.
the youngest member of a family, group, etc.
4.
an immature or childish person.
5.
a human fetus.
But of course, the dictionary must be wrong. It can't possibly know the correct definition of "human being" either:
human being?
- noun
1.
any individual of the genus Homo, esp. a member of the species Homo sapiens.
2.
a person, esp. as distinguished from other animals or as representing the human species:
I love animals and I try to save as many as I can whenever I see them. I also eat meat. That in no way compares to abortion. Killing a human baby for no reason vs. killing an animal for no reason. I'm against both but you're comparing apples and oranges.
I can't understand how you can be ok with killing a tiny human being who should be PROTECTED in the womb, but be against killing an animal for food.

reply from: AshMarie88

She made her choice to have a child or not when she decided to spread her legs. The only 100% full-proof way to prevent pregnancy is to *gasp* not have sex! A woman is so surprised when she uses birth control and still gets pregnant. Why is she surprised? Doesn't she know where babies come from, how babies are made? Apparently not if she thinks birth control can prevent pregnancy as well as it's supposed to.
A woman shouldn't be surprised if she gets pregnant from an act that was intended for making babies in the first place.
Responsibility should be taken prior to conception. Abortion is not responsibility.
What kind of "orphanage" are you talking about? Not the kind in Annie? That's so 1930s.
And I agree, they need a lot of care and love, but apparently you believe that abortion greets them with care and love as they are being ripped to shreds slowly and painfully.
No one is ever 100% ready to have a child. Unless you are Angelina Jolie who has millions so she can pawn her kids off to nannies, you're never 100% ready. My parents definitely were not ready to have me, but my mom thankfully chose to keep me and my dad chose to step up so I wouldn't be without a dad.
I honestly don't know a single person in my family who was ready to have their kids. But they did and life is amazing for all of us. We have each other, we love each other, we're happy. That's what counts. You don't need to be 100% "ready" to have kids. Some early 20 year olds are more ready than 30 or 40 year olds, I'll say.
Or let's just say that for 10 years, a parent can easily care for their kid, but what happens 10 years later when that parent gets laid off and it makes it twice as hard to feed and support that kid? What now? Think about it.

reply from: BossMomma

Ever occur to you that teenagers shouldn't be shagging in the first place? On rape? I was a rape baby and my mother beams with pride that she didn't abort me, I am her most successful child. Don't give me the insensate BS, a person in a coma is insensate so should it be fine to off them too? There is no excuse for killing one's child. Rape, unplanned pregnancies those can be fixed with adoption. My fiance and I plan to adopt as I was sterilized (to prevent unwanted pregnancy) so who knows, that baby who is spared the abortionists cruelty might be the next happy addition to my home.

reply from: BossMomma

I grew up in a modular home, most mistake them for trailers. 4 bedrooms, 2 1/2 bathrooms..I like the country so much better. Can't wait till the new house is built.

reply from: BossMomma

What does the Autobot have to do with anything.
And what is so ill about my ideas.
What's ill about your ideas? Lets start with your belief that it's a good thing to kill for convenience. Real women are stronger than that, they don't have to kill to be successful. I have three children and have two very successful careers in Criminal Justice and, in Phlebotomy and yes, legally I'm a single mother. Women can beat the odds if they reach for that strength and endurance that God gave us all. If you really don't think you're ready to be a mother, let me or another hopeful family adopt and love that baby.

reply from: Banned Member

First I never said that I stand on I higher moral ground than anyone.
You clearly were posturing when you stated;
That is the most horrid, convoluted and nonsequitous line of reasoning I've ever witnessed.
Somehow you are able to equate the killing of your own offspring with choosing items from a menu? WTF?... "Excuse me waiter, I'm ready to order. I'll have the Chicken Kiev and a side salad with ranch dressing and for dessert I'd like you to murder my unborn child."
I think it is egoistic, immoral, irresponsible, and ignorant to have unprotected sex out of wedlock. Clearly having sex before you're ready is as EGOISTIC as it gets.
An orphanage? You love children but you think it's OK to create and destroy them for convenience sake. Do you hear yourself? God help us all.

reply from: CP

Why are several posters attacking premarital sex here? That's a personal choice, and none of your concerns. Lots of unmarried people live in monogamous relationships and raise families, and lots of married women get abortions. I realize some of you don't approve of sex outside of marriage (at least for other people, since some who object have probably done it themselves), but let's please don't pretend that it causes abortions just because of your personal bias. Abortion is a different issue from premarital sex.

reply from: Shenanigans

That's actually a very interesting comparison. You said people have the right to choose to eat meat and that you dont' agree with meat eating, but you also agree peopel have the right to choose to kill their unborn children.
Both the animal being eaten and the foetus being killed did not choose to be eaten or killed respectively.
It seems like a bit of a power trip, choosing death for another based on your own desires.
Of course, the difference is that its not biologically viable for a human being to kill their offspring. Its counter productive to our genetic make up. Whereas we require animal meat for good health, and have evolved to do so.

reply from: Elessar

How can you say that abortion and premarital sex are different issues when 2/3 of all abortions are procured by women who are not married. The rightness or wrongness of premarital sex aside, you have to acknowledge that unmarried women are more likely to abort than married women.

reply from: CP

That doesn't mean they abort because they're single, does it? Statistics show that most women abort for financial reasons. It just happens that single women have more financial difficulties.
I can say that premarital sex and abortion are two different issues because they obviously are...
Poor women are more likely to abort, and single women are more likely to be poor. Just because a TV show first aired on 9/11 doesn't mean it had anything to do with the attack on the WTC. Correlation does not imply causation.

reply from: CP

Since most abortions are performed on Christian women, might we assume that Christianity causes women to abort? I'm pretty sure the percentage is as high or higher for Christian women than for single women...
This also raises questions about single Christian women, but I have never seen the stats broken down in that way. I have often wondered if the high rate of Christian abortion has anything to do with them wanting to hide the fact that they were having premarital sex. Think about it. If a single Christian woman gets pregnant, she can abort, and no one need ever know. If she carries the child to term, it would be quite obvious. Maybe if there was not so much self righteous condemnation, it would reduce the rate of abortion, but as you can see, people go out of their way to be judgmental on the subject, even bringing it up on this thread, where it wasnot really relevant.
Many seem to most vocally condemn "sins" they are themselves not guilty of, such as homosexuality, but do not seem overly eager to publicly condemn the "sins" they commit. They always seem to feel that their own "sins" are minor, and I often hear comments such as "I'm not perfect, just forgiven." I understand that Christians tend to feel strongly about condemning premarital sex, but perhaps some priorities are in order. Let he who is without sin cast the first stone, and be sure to tend to any planks in your eyes that might effect your aim could be good advice for many.

reply from: Elessar

That doesn't mean they abort because they're single, does it? Statistics show that most women abort for financial reasons. It just happens that single women have more financial difficulties.
I can say that premarital sex and abortion are two different issues because they obviously are...
Poor women are more likely to abort, and single women are more likely to be poor. Just because a TV show first aired on 9/11 doesn't mean it had anything to do with the attack on the WTC. Correlation does not imply causation.
It means that abort because they are not married. If 2/3 of people who have heart attacks smoke, wouldn't you infer that smoking raises the risk of heart attacks?

reply from: Elessar

People can call themselves anything they want. Because a person identifies themself as a Christian does not mean that they are practicing the virtues of the faith. If people who truthfully identified themselves as Christians were asked how many abortions they have had, do you know what the answer would be? That's right! ZERO!

reply from: CP

Not necessarily. Once more, statistics show that most women abort due to financial concerns.
Certainly not for that reason alone...
And if 2/3 of the women who abort are Christians, would you infer that being a Christian raises the risk of abortion?
Once more, correlation does not imply causation. We can certainly say that smokers are statistically more likely to have heart attacks, but we can not logically infer that smoking actually causes heart attacks for that reason alone. We might also say that, statistically, single women are more likely to abort, but the same is true of Christian women. We can not logically assume causation from that alone.

reply from: Elessar

Not necessarily. Once more, statistics show that most women abort due to financial concerns.
Certainly not for that reason alone...
And if 2/3 of the women who abort are Christians, would you infer that being a Christian raises the risk of abortion?
Once more, correlation does not imply causation. We can certainly say that smokers are statistically more likely to have heart attacks, but we can not logically infer that smoking actually causes heart attacks for that reason alone. We might also say that, statistically, single women are more likely to abort, but the same is true of Christian women. We can not logically assume causation from that alone.
Financial concerns because... because... say it with me... she's single! No man, no father, no father, no support, no second income or none at all. There is no reason to think that these women have abortions because they are pregnant. Christianity does not cause pregnancy and in fact teaches against premarital sex. Premarital sex in fact does cause pregnancy, outside of the marriage where the family is supposed to happen. Premarital sex in a non-commited relationship greatly increases abortion. How many women who could say, yes, I am in a committed relationship with a man who loves me and is financially responsible and ready to have chhildren, would then choose to abort?

reply from: joueravecfous

What is your source that claims 2/3 of all abortions are on unmarried women?

reply from: Elessar

http://www.prochoice.org/about_abortion/facts/women_who.html
Actually, according to the National Abortion Federation, 83% of women who abort, are not married. 67% have never been married.

reply from: BossMomma

How can you say that abortion and premarital sex are different issues when 2/3 of all abortions are procured by women who are not married. The rightness or wrongness of premarital sex aside, you have to acknowledge that unmarried women are more likely to abort than married women.
That couldn't possibly be because of social stigma could it? I took a lot of crap for being an unwed mother, even took crap from posters here on this board, yet people wonder why so many unwed women abort, to hide the shame. There is also the lack of a support system among families, especially teens. Many teen mothers to be are given this ultimatum: Get an abortion or get out. People need to judge not, and maybe the babies will stop dying.

reply from: Elessar

The trend would seem to be worldwide...
http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/journals/25s3099.html
For South Korea and Turkey, two countries with no national registration or service statistics, we present estimates from surveys that asked ever-married women aged 20 - 44 (South Korea) or 15 - 49 (Turkey) about their abortion experience in the previous year. The number of abortions for each of these countries is underestimated because abortions to unmarried women are not included. Given South Korea's very high mean age at marriage (about 26 - 27 for women), the proportion of women who are unmarried is substantial, and a significant number of abortions are being obtained by unmarried women.

reply from: CP

And all single women are poor? Married women do not abort?
And yet, most of the women who abort are Christians....
Ummm, so does sex when married. Sex causes pregnancy, period. It doesn't matter if you are married or not. I would also point out the fact that marriage doesn't make a pregnancy wanted, and it is generally unwanted pregnancies that are aborted.
So, it's not so much about marriage as it is "commitment?" And how have you determined that this "increases abortion?" (not necessarily disagreeing with you here, just want to hear your reasoning)
I would agree that women who want to have children probably do not usually abort. Marital status doesn't necessarily determine whether they want children, however.

reply from: Elessar

How can you say that abortion and premarital sex are different issues when 2/3 of all abortions are procured by women who are not married. The rightness or wrongness of premarital sex aside, you have to acknowledge that unmarried women are more likely to abort than married women.
That couldn't possibly be because of social stigma could it? I took a lot of crap for being an unwed mother, even took crap from posters here on this board, yet people wonder why so many unwed women abort, to hide the shame. There is also the lack of a support system among families, especially teens. Many teen mothers to be are given this ultimatum: Get an abortion or get out. People need to judge not, and maybe the babies will stop dying.
Stigma or not, we can't pretend that no connection exists between abortion and the absense of marriage.

reply from: Elessar

The highest percentages of reported abortions were for women aged
http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/ss5212a1.htm
8 out of 10 women who have abortions are unmarried. Does anyone think that with a concerned and stable father these same women would be having abortions? 8 out of 10!

reply from: CP

Neither does not being married. Religious beliefs and marital status have nothing to do with it. Most people have sex regardless of their religion (or lack thereof) or marital status. Sex causes pregnancy regardless of either. Unwanted pregnancies are often aborted, and the most common reason is financial concerns, once more, regardless of religion or marital status.

reply from: CP

Because "true Christians" do not "sin?" "True Christians" are perfect?

reply from: Elessar

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,880,00.html
Eighty-two percent of the women having abortions are unmarried or separated.

reply from: CP

And despite your denials and rationalizations, we can't pretend that no connection exists between abortion and Christianity, right?

reply from: Elessar

Neither does not being married. Religious beliefs and marital status have nothing to do with it. Most people have sex regardless of their religion (or lack thereof) or marital status. Sex causes pregnancy regardless of either. Unwanted pregnancies are often aborted, and the most common reason is financial concerns, once more, regardless of religion or marital status.
I am not saying that all women who are not married have abortions, merely that the majority of women who have abortions are not married.

reply from: Elessar

And despite your denials and rationalizations, we can't pretend that no connection exists between abortion and Christianity, right?
A woman who has an abortion has abandoned her Christianity. She has commited a graver sin by far than that of conceiving out of wedlock.

reply from: CP

And what percentage are Christians?
It seems to me that you are defying reason here in favor of attempting to blame abortion on lack of "Christian morals," while desperately attempting to rationalize the fact that most abortions are performed on Christian women! The research clearly shows that, while most are performed on Christians, that is not why they abort, and while most are unmarried, that is not why they abort either. Married or not, Christian or not, most women abort for financial reasons!

reply from: BossMomma

How can you say that abortion and premarital sex are different issues when 2/3 of all abortions are procured by women who are not married. The rightness or wrongness of premarital sex aside, you have to acknowledge that unmarried women are more likely to abort than married women.
That couldn't possibly be because of social stigma could it? I took a lot of crap for being an unwed mother, even took crap from posters here on this board, yet people wonder why so many unwed women abort, to hide the shame. There is also the lack of a support system among families, especially teens. Many teen mothers to be are given this ultimatum: Get an abortion or get out. People need to judge not, and maybe the babies will stop dying.
Stigma or not, we can't pretend that no connection exists between abortion and the absense of marriage.
That connection exists partly because of the stigma. Marriage does not put a baby in the clear, not by any stretch. It damn sure didn't spare the Peterson baby from his tragic fate. One of the top causes of death for pregnant women is homocide committed by the father. If I had stuck by my man in my last pregnancy I'd have been a married woman with two live children and two dead as it had been his opinion that I should abort. I'm proud to be a single mother who did her best to give life to both of her unborn, even if one died anyway.

reply from: BossMomma

And despite your denials and rationalizations, we can't pretend that no connection exists between abortion and Christianity, right?
Heh, wonder how many christian women slip off to the abortion clinic on friday and attend church as usual on Sunday.

reply from: CP

And despite your denials and rationalizations, we can't pretend that no connection exists between abortion and Christianity, right?
A woman who has an abortion has abandoned her Christianity. She has commited a graver sin by far than that of conceiving out of wedlock.
All have sinned and fallen short. Are you really telling me that there is a line drawn n the sand by God that one can not cross and still be a Christian? You can sin and be a Christian, but there is a level of sin that excludes you? You have determined that post abortive Christians can not be Christians, but practicing whores can? You obviously interpret the scriptures much differently than I do.
I do hear this kind of thing a lot, Christians claiming others Christians are not actually Christians, based on the level of sin they commit. I can never seem to get them to show me exactly where the line is drawn, but there is one constant I can always count on. Every single Christian who makes these arguments is invariably on the "right" side of the line. The sins they commit are always forgivable in their view, regardless of what they might be. Their own sins are never of the serious type!
I'm sorely tempted to start quoting scripture here, but there is probably no point....

reply from: Elessar

And despite your denials and rationalizations, we can't pretend that no connection exists between abortion and Christianity, right?
I believe that such a stigma once existed. I believe that all that remains is the new ease with which women seek abortions.

reply from: CP

And despite your denials and rationalizations, we can't pretend that no connection exists between abortion and Christianity, right?
I believe that such a stigma once existed. I believe that all that remains is the new ease with which women seek abortions.
Clearly, that "stigma" is on display on this very thread!

reply from: lukesmom

Not a single one of us here or any other prolifer I know wants to take away women's right to have or not have children but the fact is; once a woman is pregnant she already has a child, it just lives in her womb until developed enough to be born.
Again, once a woman is pregnant she already has a child and is already providing everything that child needs at the time. If she thinks she can't provide for that child once he/she is born, she does have the option of adoption. A newborn is not destined for an "orphanage".

reply from: Hereforareason

The thread has been rather hijacked I would say. I don't know if the originator of this thread will be coming back to continue her discussion or not, but let's move the religion topic elsewhere in case she does. Muddle the waters as little as possible for her. CP, please come join the new thread.
Amber

reply from: CP

And despite your denials and rationalizations, we can't pretend that no connection exists between abortion and Christianity, right?
Heh, wonder how many christian women slip off to the abortion clinic on friday and attend church as usual on Sunday.
The Bible says "strait is the gate and narrow the way....few there be that find it," but while there seem to be quite a few that are qualified to determine who is and is not o0n the right path, I have yet to meet one that can not broaden it sufficiently so as to convince themselves that they are on it even if nobody else is....

reply from: Elessar

CP wants to make it about religion. I contend that unmarried women are far more likely to have abortions. Every organization that tracks this kind of data confirms this.

reply from: Hereforareason

Agreed. Thank you.
I do not fully agree with your statement BossMomma.
If the ultimatum is to hide the sin, or leave so it doesn't affect the family then judgment is not the problem, it is the lack of compassion and love. (If you don't like the word sin you can deal with it or insert the words "activity")
To "judge" is also a controversial topic. I will probably do a word study on it before debating the word further.
However I would assume you agree that the issue in the above scenario is not that the parents may have told the teen she had done wrong, but that they did not show support and love in the next difficult phase of her life.
I agree with the overall picture you were trying to paint in that too many single teen mothers are being pressured to abort. Therefore the guilt for that abortion is shared by those parents, siblings, boyfriends and relatives who even suggested that the "problem" could be fixed by ending that life.
Amber

reply from: CP

It was made to be about religion on page one, then when I objected, you decided to argue the point. It went further than I intended it to, but it was relevant to the responses to the OP.
Hereforareason is right, though, so I'm done here. In my opinion, the thread was "hijacked" on page one, but I give props to the posters who didn't get sucked in.

reply from: BossMomma

Agreed. Thank you.
I do not fully agree with your statement BossMomma.
If the ultimatum is to hide the sin, or leave so it doesn't affect the family then judgment is not the problem, it is the lack of compassion and love. (If you don't like the word sin you can deal with it or insert the words "activity")
To "judge" is also a controversial topic. I will probably do a word study on it before debating the word further.
However I would assume you agree that the issue in the above scenario is not that the parents may have told the teen she had done wrong, but that they did not show support and love in the next difficult phase of her life.
I agree with the overall picture you were trying to paint in that too many single teen mothers are being pressured to abort. Therefore the guilt for that abortion is shared by those parents, siblings, boyfriends and relatives who even suggested that the "problem" could be fixed by ending that life.
Amber
Judgement is the problem, families are afraid of how society will judge them, or how the church will judge them when in fact, only God has the right to judge. Whether premarital sex is wrong or right it is no ones business but Gods and, he will punish or pardon as he sees fit. Jesus taught that we love one another as he has loved us, not turn murderous the minute a baby is concieved of less than bible perfect circumstances.

reply from: DenkiGroove

That child you're talking about is not a child at all; it's only a fetus.
Again, a fetus is not a child. It's a fetus.

reply from: BossMomma

That child you're talking about is not a child at all; it's only a fetus.
Again, a fetus is not a child. It's a fetus.
So somehow a fetus 2 minutes from birth is something different than the baby being placed in mom's arms? A fetus is a child, as one who has been pregnant and felt the kicks and the movements, I know even without the benefit of science that the fetus I carried in my womb and the baby I carried in my arms were one and the same.

reply from: lukesmom

That child you're talking about is not a child at all; it's only a fetus.
Again, a fetus is not a child. It's a fetus.
Is an infant a child? How about a toddler or a preschooler or an adolecent? Heck there are even adult children. Going to have one of those soon myself. Anyway, embryo and a fetus is a child in early developement.
Definition of CHILD
1a : an unborn or recently born person
b dialect : a female infant
2a : a young person especially between infancy and youth b : a childlike or childish person c : a person not yet of age
3usually childe \?ch?(-?)ld\ archaic : a youth of noble birth
4a : a son or daughter of human parents
Examples of CHILD
the birth of a child
She's pregnant with their first child.
a play for both children and adults
All of their children are grown now.
an elderly couple and their adult children
Men are such children sometimes.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/child

reply from: lukesmom

That child you're talking about is not a child at all; it's only a fetus.
Again, a fetus is not a child. It's a fetus.
I get it, another hit and run troller.

reply from: AshMarie88

If a fetus isn't a person, neither are we. A non-person cannot suddenly become a person in a magical second.

reply from: Shenanigans

That child you're talking about is not a child at all; it's only a fetus.
Again, a fetus is not a child. It's a fetus.
Mosby's medical dictionary, and a good few others, express that a "child" is defined as anyone under teh age of 12, including those in the gestational stage, ie. foetuses.
The confusion is people seem to think baby and child are being used to define the foetus, the foetus is not a baby, but she is a child, just as a toddler is a child, but not a baby.
I really, really wish people would learn the terms. I mean, its not that hard.

reply from: Shenanigans

There was a particular country about, ooh, say 60 years ago, that said Jews weren't persons.
Subjective terms. Very dangerous to use to determine rights or humanity.

reply from: yosephdaviyd

We attack it because it is not the natural order of things. God gave us sex, not for recreation, to make money, or just selfish motives, but for marriage - the well being of spouses and the procreation of children.
And it is NOT just your personal choice. Everything you do affects people around you. This is your life CP, but it is not all about you!

reply from: yosephdaviyd

Link to my article "Saving Sex for Marriage"
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/5713668/saving_sex_for_marriage.html?cat=41

-------------------------
David L. Gray (Yoseph Daviyd)
---------------------------------------------
* My Articles - http://www.associatedcontent.com/user/871946/david_l_gray_yoseph_david.html

* My Blog - http://yosephmdaviyd.blogspot.com/

reply from: CP

These are not facts, but beliefs. I can respect yours. Can you respect mine? Clearly you can not.
God gave us sex for "the well being of spouses and the procreation of children?" Do you think these things are not possible without having stood in front of a minister and saying "I do?"
I disagree. Whether I will marry before having sex certainly is a personal choice. I do not consider your disapproval to be a legitimate effect that would justify your assuming it is your place to condemn me for it.

reply from: yosephdaviyd

I cannot condemn you CP. If you condemn yourself that is your business. I am just here to help you discover your humanity in the light of the God who became human for your sake.

reply from: AshMarie88

A lot of married couples get pregnant and don't want kids, so they abort. This is not a conversation about sex before marriage because a lot of people who have sex before marriage keep their babies and would never abort.
Not everyone is religious, please keep religion out of abortion.

reply from: yosephdaviyd

1. Yes, the bottom line is sex before marriage, because if only married people were having sex then there would not be an abortion issue - neither would their be an abortion-by-contraception issue. Is not for recreation, profit, or selfish indulgence. Men who have sex with women who they are not married to are, genrally, using them for sex - bottom line. If he really wants to be with you then he will marry you. There are some exceptions, but those are the rules.
2. Whatever forms your reason go for it, but my faith forms my reason - therefore, the abortion is very much intrinsic to my Catholic faith.

reply from: CP

Because married women do not seek abortions?

reply from: AshMarie88

1. I'm getting married in 2 months but I'm still "active" as you would say, with my soon to be husband. I am pro-life, but I am also infertile. I would never abort even if I got pregnant outside of marriage, I would never abort for any reason (unless both lives were in grave danger).
2. Not everyone is religious, not everyone wants to listen to a religious "nut". I'm Christian but I don't bring up religion in debates UNLESS the person I am debating is also religious. No one wants to listen to someone who is constantly bring up religion. It would be nice if everyone was religious, but not everyone is, and you have to focus on abortion in a different aspect sometimes.

reply from: AshMarie88

Because married women do not seek abortions?
Yea, that's my question too. There are thousands, maybe millions of couples who choose abortion, and those couples are MARRIED. Makes you wonder.
Some of the debate is a married/unmarried factor, like if a single woman who thinks she has no other choice to abort was married and supported, she may choose another option. But it doesn't count for a lot of other cases.

reply from: Banned Member

That doesn't mean they abort because they're single, does it? Statistics show that most women abort for financial reasons. It just happens that single women have more financial difficulties.
I can say that premarital sex and abortion are two different issues because they obviously are...
Poor women are more likely to abort, and single women are more likely to be poor. Just because a TV show first aired on 9/11 doesn't mean it had anything to do with the attack on the WTC. Correlation does not imply causation.
OK Mr. Obvious Hairsplitter, what if I were to state it this way.
Having sex, getting pregnant and raising children is made easier in a Married or committed, two partnered head of household arrangement, due to the possibility that increased resources may be available to the members of the family. On the other hand, premarital sex is usually an ill advised activity due to the possibility of the occurrence of an unplanned pregnancy of a women who may have insufficient resource to properly raise the child and therefore increases the possibility, as supported by the statistical evidence, that said woman may often seek an abortion.
You know this is what she meant.

reply from: CP

" Married or......." So, you actually concede that marriage is irrelevant, then?
Think about how this effects the stats regarding unmarried women and abortion.
Because married women have no possibility of unplanned/unwanted pregnancies? And married women need never be concerned about "insufficient resources?"
Supported by the statistical data? If that's what you're going on, you have no case. By your own admission, it is not marital status, but the possibility of unplanned pregnancy and availability of resources that are significant factors here!
Bear in mind that many of these unmarried women who abort might very well be in "committed" relationships...

reply from: BossMomma

" Married or......." So, you actually concede that marriage is irrelevant, then?
Think about how this effects the stats regarding unmarried women and abortion.
Because married women have no possibility of unplanned/unwanted pregnancies? And married women need never be concerned about "insufficient resources?"
Supported by the statistical data? If that's what you're going on, you have no case. By your own admission, it is not marital status, but the possibility of unplanned pregnancy and availability of resources that are significant factors here!
Bear in mind that many of these unmarried women who abort might very well be in "committed" relationships...
When I was married, 9 times out of 10 we were broker than the ten commandments. We had been homeless, lived out of a car and, were using t-shirts on our son when he ran out of diapers. Life didn't improve until I divorced my husband. Marriage isn't everything, my girls are better off with a single mom than my son was with married parents.

reply from: yosephdaviyd

1. I'm getting married in 2 months but I'm still "active" as you would say, with my soon to be husband. I am pro-life, but I am also infertile. I would never abort even if I got pregnant outside of marriage, I would never abort for any reason (unless both lives were in grave danger).
2. Not everyone is religious, not everyone wants to listen to a religious "nut". I'm Christian but I don't bring up religion in debates UNLESS the person I am debating is also religious. No one wants to listen to someone who is constantly bring up religion. It would be nice if everyone was religious, but not everyone is, and you have to focus on abortion in a different aspect sometimes.
Congrats on your marriage! What I have found out from being married and divorced is that the things that I was doing before I was married were the same things I was doing after I got married - thus, I was having sex with people who I was not married to before I got married and that continuned after I got married.
A lot of what I talk about concerning abortion is directed towards the natural law, that we all can know through reason alone. That there is a proper order of things is evident in all of nature. That all things were created for a purpose is evident in all of nature. That marriage is for the procreation of children and the will being of spouses is self-evident through the natural law. Therefore, if marriage is ordered for the procreation of children and the well being of spouses then it follows that sex is for marriage.
Like I said, sex outside of marriage is usually all about self-pleasure and not what is best for the other person.

reply from: BossMomma

1. I'm getting married in 2 months but I'm still "active" as you would say, with my soon to be husband. I am pro-life, but I am also infertile. I would never abort even if I got pregnant outside of marriage, I would never abort for any reason (unless both lives were in grave danger).
2. Not everyone is religious, not everyone wants to listen to a religious "nut". I'm Christian but I don't bring up religion in debates UNLESS the person I am debating is also religious. No one wants to listen to someone who is constantly bring up religion. It would be nice if everyone was religious, but not everyone is, and you have to focus on abortion in a different aspect sometimes.
Congrats on your marriage! What I have found out from being married and divorced is that the things that I was doing before I was married were the same things I was doing after I got married - thus, I was having sex with people who I was not married to before I got married and that continuned after I got married.
A lot of what I talk about concerning abortion is directed towards the natural law, that we all can know through reason alone. That there is a proper order of things is evident in all of nature. That all things were created for a purpose is evident in all of nature. That marriage is for the procreation of children and the will being of spouses is self-evident through the natural law. Therefore, if marriage is ordered for the procreation of children and the well being of spouses then it follows that sex is for marriage.
Like I said, sex outside of marriage is usually all about self-pleasure and not what is best for the other person.
Totally wrong, sex outside of marriage serves almost the same purpose as marital sex. While procreation usually isn't intended, the sex is meant for bonding and strengthening the relationship. Not all married couples want to procreate, yet they still have sex. I am sterile and engaged to be married, I will never give birth, but don't think I'll be abstinate with my fiance/husband.

reply from: Shenanigans

I think a lot of the reasons the single/unmarried woman aborts can cross over into the married couple's reasons.
Money seems to be a big one. Job stability/advancement another. Perhaps ongoing education is taking place within the marriage and a child at that stage would interupt that.
A few years back there was a doco made in our little country about abortion, and one of the women that aborted did so because she and her husband were on a "break" and decided while they would probably get back together - they did - it woudl be wrong to bring a child into that, so they killed the kid.
I'm not sure about whether its in the stats, but the other factor could be other children, I've met lots of married women who've aborted because they already have x number of children and feel another would add too much burden or take their attention away from their other kids.
Then there's probably a raft of couples who marry not wanting children and fall pregnant and abort.
While the married couple are probably a lot better off in terms of money and support from each other, they can still find plenty of reasons to abort.
And I suppose to a social extent, marriage was once something peopel did if they wanted to settle down and have children, now adays sex has been removed from the act of procreation, and thus from marriage, so marriage has become a kind of civil partnership where finances are combined and tax breaks are gained.

reply from: AshMarie88

What about married couples that don't want children but still want to please each other and bond in that special way? There is nothing wrong with that.
If sex wasn't created to be enjoyed, then God wouldn't have made it so pleasurable. I disagree with USING sex for your own selfish wants, but I don't believe it's wrong when you're with someone you love and you both are not even trying to have a baby.
But that's just my own personal opinion.

reply from: Banned Member

Well, there's a strange non sequitur.
OK.. i'm done thinking about it.. again. So now what's supposed to happen?
Ahem.. those are your words, not mine,
Again.. your words. You don't really need another poster to carry on a conversation up here do you? You just make up stuff you wish I'd have said and then you put a question mark behind it so as to imply that I had said it. Maybe you'd like to be alone? I feel as if I may be intruding.
You're going to have to start making sense sooner or later if you expect any kind of cogent response to this inappropriately critical gibberish. You essentially just disagreed with me by agreeing with me. What the...? Maybe you're just overtired.
Oh really? Well, DUH!

reply from: Shenanigans

Whether its God or quirks of evolution, sex needs to be pleasurable so people will engage in it, why, because who would want to try and squeeze something size of a watermelon out of a whole the size of a 50c piece if sex was just a nusiance?
If sex was rubbish, no one would have it, no one would get pregnant, good bye human race.

reply from: BossMomma

Whether its God or quirks of evolution, sex needs to be pleasurable so people will engage in it, why, because who would want to try and squeeze something size of a watermelon out of a whole the size of a 50c piece if sex was just a nusiance?
If sex was rubbish, no one would have it, no one would get pregnant, good bye human race.
Cats [mate] three times a year and ain't nothing about cat sex pleasurable. Males have spiney penises that often scrape the female painfully, hence that yowl and slap she gives the male afterwards..yet cats keep [mating]..go fig.

reply from: Shenanigans

Well, for one, cats aren't sentient enough to comtemplate on the scrapiness of cat sex.
Secondly, maybe all Toms are just rapists. From the cat sex I've walked in on it defintely looked that way. From my understanding its so the Tom can scrap out the "leavings" of previous Toms.
So not only are all Toms rapists, cat ladies are wh0res. Or perhaps just mashicists (is that the word?)
And you can bet your arse hairs that if human males had spines on their pee-pees women would be completely subjugated or we would have found a way to pluck them off.
But pregnancy and birth for she cats aren't a big deal (for the vaste majority), not like it is for human females. Its the pelvis.

reply from: CP

Well, there's a strange non sequitur.
OK.. i'm done thinking about it.. again. So now what's supposed to happen?
Ahem.. those are your words, not mine,
Again.. your words. You don't really need another poster to carry on a conversation up here do you? You just make up stuff you wish I'd have said and then you put a question mark behind it so as to imply that I had said it. Maybe you'd like to be alone? I feel as if I may be intruding.
You're going to have to start making sense sooner or later if you expect any kind of cogent response to this inappropriately critical gibberish. You essentially just disagreed with me by agreeing with me. What the...? Maybe you're just overtired.
Oh really? Well, DUH!
This is a pretty long post, yet it doesn't appear to say anything. It would seem, from what I can gather, that you did not understand my response to you, however, so I'll try again.
It has been implied that premarital sex causes abortions. I have objected, and argued against that claim. You seemed to be attempting to argue in favor of it, yet your response appeared to contradict your presumed intentions. I pointed this out to you (or at least tried), but now I'm not sure where we stand.
Would you please reread our exchange and tell me what part, specifically, you are having trouble with, and why? You don't appear to have made any effort to explain anything relevant in your last response.

reply from: CP

The desire is there even if the act is not pleasurable, and it is arguably pleasurable for the male. Maybe that works for cats, and mutual pleasure works better for humans. It is my understanding that sex can be painful for human females as well, but it if it was not pleasurable for human males, they would be less likely to complete the act.

reply from: Tam

So, do you know about the device called Rapex? It is a spiny thing that women (human ones, anyway!) can wear inside their vaginas, like one would wear a tampon, and if a penis enters the vagina--well, I think it's something of the opposite effect of the cat interaction you're describing. LOL Anyway, google "Rapex" for a boatload of info. Eliminating the horror of rape should of course be a priority for all decent people. Anyone who has been raped, or has a loved one who has been raped, knows the incredible effect it has on someone. And sometimes, yes, a baby can be a blessing after the fact, but (meaning no disrespect to already existing children of any age or conception story) how wonderful it would be if instead of that, rapists got stopped in their tracks, apprehended, and brought to justice! If we can eliminate rape (don't say it's impossible unless you also think it's impossible to eliminate abortion), it would remove one of the biggest pro-choice arguments (note: it is not a VALID argument, and I'll happily debate that with anyone, but it is a COMMON argument).

reply from: AquaGirl

If you really want to know if an unborn baby feels pain you can watch Eclipse of Reason, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_nff8I2FVnI, and watch the baby try to avoid the abortion and pull back in pain. It is not easy to watch but for someone who is pro-choice I don't suppose it would be hard. Also, go to http://www.lifedynamics.com and look for "4d ultrasound picture in the womb" (on the right) and on the left side bar for "100 abortion pictures".
Please do check this all out and come back and tell me what you think. I don't care what you eat but I do care what you do to a fellow human being!

reply from: joueravecfous

Or one could research actual scientific studies of fetal pain.

reply from: Banned Member

Well, there's a strange non sequitur.
OK.. i'm done thinking about it.. again. So now what's supposed to happen?
Ahem.. those are your words, not mine,
Again.. your words. [IMG][/IMG] You don't really need another poster to carry on a conversation up here do you? You just make up stuff you wish I'd have said and then you put a question mark behind it so as to imply that I had said it. [IMG][/IMG] Maybe you'd like to be alone? I feel as if I may be intruding. [IMG][/IMG]
You're going to have to start making sense sooner or later if you expect any kind of cogent response to this inappropriately critical gibberish. You essentially just disagreed with me by agreeing with me. What the...? Maybe you're just overtired.
Oh really? Well, DUH!
This is a pretty long post, yet it doesn't appear to say anything. It would seem, from what I can gather, that you did not understand my response to you, however, so I'll try again.
It has been implied that premarital sex causes abortions. I have objected, and argued against that claim. You seemed to be attempting to argue in favor of it, yet your response appeared to contradict your presumed intentions. I pointed this out to you (or at least tried), but now I'm not sure where we stand.
Would you please reread our exchange and tell me what part, specifically, you are having trouble with, and why? You don't appear to have made any effort to explain anything relevant in your last response.
Of course you would say that CP.. as you can't help yourself from being dismissively condescending from time to time.
Since you have , in fact, failed to comprehend my position, I shall re-sate it.
Your assertion that premarital sex does not cause abortion, is fundamentally flawed. Doctor cause abortions.. you big silly.
Sex causes pregnancy, therefore marital, premarital and post-marital sex have the potential of ultimately leading to an abortion event. Since 51% of the women in the U.S., that are of age to marry, are unmarried, and since the unmarried group represents 83% of the women having abortions, then it follows that unmarried women engaging in sex will abort any resulting pregnancies at a much higher rate than married women.
The stats on how much sex each respective group participates in appears to be currently unavailable.
Now that I have jumped though all of these hoops for your benefit CP, you at least owe me a cookie.

reply from: Banned Member

... and one could be courteous enough to supply some links.

reply from: Banned Member

joueravecfous may be to skittish to watch that film. The truth can be upsetting.

reply from: CP

I readily concede that unmarried women are statistically more likely to abort than married women, just as Christian women are statistically more likely to abort than non-Christian women. My objection is to the illogical assumption that this means marital status is the cause. Correlation does not necessarily imply causation. I can not possibly put it any more succinctly. The most reasonable conclusion, based on all available data, is that the primary cause is lack of financial stability.
Agreed. We can logically conclude that single women are more likely to abort, but that doesn't mean it is reasonable to assume marital status is the cause.

reply from: BossMomma

So just what makes humans more sentient than other animals? We can't talk to them and so how do we know the level of sentience in a cat? I have two cats that are down right human at times (especially when your female cat is toilet trained and, you've found yourself walking in on your cat on the loo)

reply from: CP

Clearly, it has been argued that premarital sex causes abortions, the implication being that marital status is a significant factor. I have asserted that it is illogical to assume that, if these single women who abort were to marry before having sex, that would somehow change the fact that they do not want a child. If the reason she did not want a child in the first place was her marital status, then that would change everything, but research shows that is not the case. Most women, regardless of marital status, abort for financial reasons. It may be that marriage alleviates their financial concerns, or it may not...
It is not logical to assume that premarital sex is a significant factor. Unmarried couples share the same benefits, if committed, that married couples enjoy, and married couples who are not committed (marriage obviously doesn't imply commitment, as evidenced by the high divorce rate) have no real advantage over "fornicators" who are not committed.

reply from: firestar

I am not heartless not to feel pain for that child. But that was late abort. And at least in my motherland Bulgaria it is forbidden. I don't know if the things in the US have changed. But I hope they have because I think that late pregnancy is not moral. At least the medicine. What an idiot would not know in what stage of the pregnancy the women is. And how can you let her see the bucket of blood and the baby in it. Idiots. Yet I still believe that before the tenth week the embryo is nothing more than a cat or a cow at that stage. I really think that emotions make us human and I don't think it feels them at that stage at least. But please go to this link http://www.goveg.com/factoryFarming.asp and see why a do not consume meat.

reply from: BossMomma

I am not heartless not to feel pain for that child. But that was late abort. And at least in my motherland Bulgaria it is forbidden. I don't know if the things in the US have changed. But I hope they have because I think that late pregnancy is not moral. At least the medicine. What an idiot would not know in what stage of the pregnancy the women is. And how can you let her see the bucket of blood and the baby in it. Idiots. Yet I still believe that before the tenth week the embryo is nothing more than a cat or a cow at that stage. I really think that emotions make us human and I don't think it feels them at that stage at least. But please go to this link http://www.goveg.com/factoryFarming.asp and see why a do not consume meat.
I'm going to guess that you are not well versed in the English language as you're post made little sense. Whether a fetus can or can't feel pain is irrelevent. IF lack of sensitivity to pain made it okay to kill a fetus, who's to say it's not just as ok to kill people under anesthesia or people in a coma? A human fetus is a human being, a human child at any stage, not a cat or a cow. Also, what does factory farming have to do with abortion? You oppose cattle being slaughtered in cruel ways but support an equally grizzly death for a human child?

reply from: lukesmom

No difference between a late abort or an early abort. Result is the same: a human life ended. Tell me why killing a fetus toward the end of gestation is immoral and killing a fetus at the beginning of gestation is not. That is like saying killing an infant is ok but killing a toddler isn't.
Of course, I don't know about you but all 6 times I have been pregnant, I was not pregnant with a cat or a cow or any other animal, instead I was pregnant with a human life. If emotions make us human, you feel infants aren't human? What are they? Geez, can you read a biology and anatomy and physiology book and at least make a stab at educating yourself on this?

reply from: CP

Can you explain to me why it would be morally acceptable to kill an unborn human being at one point, but not another? Every human being who is killed suffers a loss, that being continued existence. This is true whether they are aware of the loss or not. Murder is wrong for this reason, at least in my view. Can you explain this for me?
I assume you mean you value a human being no more than a cat or cow at that stage...Can you explain to me why? It is obviously a human being at any stage, right? What changes about that human being at the moment it reaches 10 weeks? How is it different from when it was 9 weeks, 6 days, 23 hours, and 59 minutes?

reply from: aaronmhatch

What's the difference between a sleeping adult human and a sleeping cow?
One will wake up and have human consciousness, and the other will not.
What's the difference between a fetus and a cow?
I'm sure you can figure out the answer.

reply from: BossMomma

lol, a sleeping human doesn't usually get woken up by a pair of cold hands in the morning?

reply from: AshMarie88

I am not heartless not to feel pain for that child. But that was late abort. And at least in my motherland Bulgaria it is forbidden. I don't know if the things in the US have changed. But I hope they have because I think that late pregnancy is not moral. At least the medicine. What an idiot would not know in what stage of the pregnancy the women is. And how can you let her see the bucket of blood and the baby in it. Idiots. Yet I still believe that before the tenth week the embryo is nothing more than a cat or a cow at that stage. I really think that emotions make us human and I don't think it feels them at that stage at least. But please go to this link http://www.goveg.com/factoryFarming.asp and see why a do not consume meat.
You don't feel emotions when you are in a deep sleep. It must be ok to say that if someone killed you it would be justified.

reply from: terry

LOL So when I read that other post, and thought to myself, "Well, I guess you're not really a forum moderator until someone calls you a nazi," and felt almost a little bit touched that I had reached that important milestone...it wasn't real? Little did I know, that was NOT the first time I'd been called a nazi--it was the 2ND time?? Way to rain on my parade, BossMomma!


2017 ~ LifeDiscussions.org ~ Discussions on Life, Abortion, and the Surrounding Politics